Premium Essay

Ls312 Ethics

In: Other Topics

Submitted By tapmsu21
Words 1341
Pages 6
LS312 Unit Eight Cost Justified Minicase

Tapestry Dalrymple

February 5, 2013

The stakeholders in the Cost Justified Minicase are Joe the District Manager of Computer Operations, Mary, Joe’s supervisor, the CEO, the employees, the shareholder, and the company. The interests of the stakeholders are avoiding scandals, following legislation by knowing the security laws, understanding public interests, and displaying accountability. Every stakeholder has the rights and responsibility to promote honesty and integrity from management.

This case applies to the Securities Acts and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Joe and Mary participated in illegal and unethical actions. Both knew there was a performance problem but reported a misrepresentation of the recently installed system that was actually not achieving the expected results. Mary requested a report to be written by Joe that the system was performing as projected even though it was not and send a copy to the CEO. It was also a request for Joe to send in a report that the savings portrayed in the original justification documents are being achieved. Joe worked hard to achieve his goals in the company and was worried about Mary’s request and the statement she made to him about having doubts about his ability to perform as a District Manager for the company because of his reluctance to her request.

This misrepresentations affect the company financially and the shareholders and their investments. With respect to the legal aspect of this case, it is against the Securities Acts. Management must follow the laws and regulations of the Securities Acts, which prohibits certain types of conduct (Kaplan eGuide, n.d.). According to Kaplan eGuide (n.d.), “The SEC requires that companies submit certain documents for review, including: registration statements for...

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Ls312 Ethics and the Legal Environment Unit 2

...Douglas L. Kaye LS312: Ethics and the Legal Environment Unit 2 Prof. Craig July 16th, 2013 John Stuart Mill developed a systematic statement of utilitarian ethical theory, which is another ethical theory based on the consequences of actions. The application of this theory involves performing the action that produces the best results for the greatest number of people. Utilitarianism can be further reduced into two sub-categories, act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. Followers of act utilitarianism think that in each ethical situation, an individual should perform the action that produces the best results for the majority of people. Rule utilitarianism requires people to construct and follow an established set of rules that should guarantee the best possible outcome for the majority of the people. Critics of both utilitarianism positions argue that it is extremely difficult to determine future consequences for other people. Another problem of utilitarianism is cost benefit analysis. Essentially, in the quest to please the majority, at what point do the minority’s interest become expendable? Assigning value to individuals in this manner, and using them as a means to an end may not always be considered moral behavior in some situations or circumstances (Kemerling, 2011). In the Palm Beach Post this week was a news article titled, "Royal Palm Beach woman charged with opening fake account, stealing $6,000 from bank" which was about a 50-year-old woman, Anna......

Words: 623 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Ls312 Ethics and the Legal Environment - Unit 9

...Energy Cooperative Recommendation The Energy Cooperative is a non-profit organization that, in short, provides education to the public regarding new technology updates, monitoring viable new start-up energy companies and providing a public forum for complaints on its website. After meeting with the board of directors, I was asked to provide a recommendation on the ethical concerns with telling personal potential clients they are calling as director of the Energy Cooperative. The following is my recommendation. The ethical concerns I have are with the directors wanting to contact their personal potential clients for business gain and use their status with the non-profit to promote business for their personal gain versus the benefit of the co-op. According to Kant’s categorical imperative, an individual’s motives must be pure, if they are not, then the means cannot justify the end (Ziegler, 2011). In this case, the director’s motives to contact these potential clients can bring business connections to the co-op because of him acknowledging the group, but the director’s only goal is to profit from this for his own personal gain. Under Kant’s categorical imperative, the benefit that these potential clients can bring to the non-profit and all of its members are irrelevant because of the selfish act by the directors. It is my recommendation the directors do not use the status of their positions when contacting personal potential clients. I arrived at this conclusion......

Words: 804 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Final Project Part 1

...Final Project Part One Amanda Schneider Ethics in the Legal Environment LS312-03 February 17, 2014 Final Project Part One Immanuel Kant is the founder of the ethical theory untitled the categorical imperative. This theory is based on ethical decisions being universal to everyone in society. Being universal to society means that everyone in society would do the same thing. Kant goes further in his analysis by saying that someone’s motives must be pure. A motive is considered pure as long as it is not selfish. So to apply this theory you must test both the motive behind the action as well as the universality to the action (The Kaplan eGuide to Ethics and the Legal Environment, 2013). To examine the scenario given for this assignment you must first identify the action. In this case the action being examined is whether or not it is ethical for one board member to use their board member status when dealing with personal business contacts. The first part of Kant’s theory states that a person’s motives must be pure. In this case the board member’s motive are not pure. They want to use the board’s good name to further his personal business connections. This motive is selfish as it only produces a positive effect for the board member’s personal business. This board member is not acting with a pure motive and therefore fails the first part of Kant’s theory. Next you must apply this action universally. What would happen if every board member was allowed......

Words: 1914 - Pages: 8

Premium Essay

Amtrak Case Study

...Derrick Jones LS312: Ethics and the Legal Environment Unit-4 Assignment Amtrak Case Study July 26, 2012 First of all lets define the word, “stakeholder”. Stakeholder means people who have an interest in a particular thing. In an organization, for example a stakeholder will include the parties with interest such as employees, suppliers, customers, local communities, among other parties (Ask). In this case the stakeholders would be the crew members, the passengers, the community where this tragedy happened, the towns where Amtrak provides services are stakeholders. All these stakeholders have stakes that are directly or indirectly. The interest for all the stakeholders is to have a safe trip, but in this case the interest for the owners, and the crew members is to not have anything go wrong that may cost them financially. For the passengers, the interest was to travel in a less expensive, but comfortable manner. As for the community and cities where the train traveled, it brought customers too many businesses there. Amtrak’s corporate social responsibility legally was to have some kind of safeguards on the bridge to alert boats know there was a bridge there. We have safeguards that come down at railroad crossings way before the train gets there; so why not have the same kind of safety measures on bridges. The M/V Mauvilla should share some responsibility legally as well. They should have checked to see what the weather was like before they left to see if was safe to...

Words: 551 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Case

...Compensation/Discrimination Sandeep Barot LS312 Ethics and Legal Enviroment Kaplan University Seth Eisenberg Introduction A stakeholder refers to any organization or individual who is affected as a result the business activities (Duddington, 2007, p. 103). In this case we have Brad who is the owner of the business, and his interest is in the capital growth of the capital invested and the dividends, whereas Eddie who is the general manager of the company, Jane who is the head of the Payroll Department and Greg the service technician will be interested in their pay, job security and prospects. Legal Analysis The discrimination labor or employment law from the e-guide applies to this case. Ordinarily employers enjoy very broad discretion in making employment decisions limited by state and federal statutes that prohibits employers from discriminating against their employees and applicant’s on the basis of race color, origin or ancestry (Duddington, 2007, p. 280). The general rule is that employers must treat similarly situated employees the same way. As a result consistency in treatment of employees is critical. One types of discrimination recognized by the non-discrimination law is ‘disparate treatment’. It occurs when an employer intentionally or with an expectation of a benefit treats an employer differently on the basis of illegal considerations. In our case Eddie shows discrimination by making the decision of promoting and giving Greg the easier work tickets so......

Words: 834 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Responsibility Shifts with Bridges

...Responsibility Shifts with Bridges Candy Olson LS312-02: Ethics and the Legal Environment Kaplan University Responsibility Shifts with Bridges The words “corporate social responsibility” can get a little hairy and foggy when accidents occur. According to eGuide to Ethics and the Legal Environment chapter 2 (2010), “CSR is a business practice that demands that business organizations look to the effect their decisions have on multiple stakeholders” (eGuide 2010 pg. 3). I would have to say after reading The Wreck of Amtrak’s Sunset Limited, the question of “Who was at fault” remains a difficult quest to conquer. However, I will do my best to break this case study down into elements that will eventually present an idea as to who truly was at fault for the derailment, in my opinion. I will present to you all the stakeholders involved in this derailment, as well as their interests in cleaning up the mess this “normal accident” left in its wake. Next, I will explain the four areas of the corporation's social corporate responsibilities including the economic, legal, ethical, and philanthropic areas. Based on these four areas of corporate social responsibility, I will reveal my final synopsis of who was responsible for this derailment and provide my rationales and recommendations to each of the businesses at fault. To begin, I will present a brief history of the derailment of Sunset Limited and the “normal accident” that took place. A brief history of the “normal......

Words: 2382 - Pages: 10

Premium Essay

Ls312 Unit 5 Assign

...Tosha Collins Kaplan University LS312: Ethics and the Legal Environment Prof: Westerman April 18, 2012 As an interested stakeholder, Jane is working for R&S Electronic Service Company as head of payroll. She is concerned about her job security since this is her first job since college. Brad is the owner of R&S and wants his employees to be happy and have a profitable company. Eddie is the general manager and has the authority to hire and fire Jane. Greg is Eddie’s brother working as a service technician who is receiving higher commissions for this work. The dilemma here is that Greg is receiving special treatment because Eddie is his brother. Greg is getting the easier work paying him high commission (Helms, 1992). Other stakeholders in this case of interest would be Jane’s family and the importance of her keeping her job. This is her first job since college, but one can’t assume she doesn’t have dependents to take care of. The other employees in the company are stakeholders because they want their salaries kept confidential and want continued employment. The general public and shareholders care about the company being profitable and bringing revenue to the community. The second exception of At-Will Employment seems to be violated in this case. Eddie is telling Jane to lie about seeing the separate tickets of Greg’s. This At-Will law is not lawful because it violates a public policy exception. This means social norms or values are compromised. If an......

Words: 981 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Ls312-Unit 9 Paper

...Final Project _part 3 Vanessa James LS312 Ethics and the Legal Environment December,15th 2011 Energy Cooperative Energy cooperative’s dilemma is ethical and it is a conflict of interest. All members of the board have signed agreements that while serving on the board, they will act without prejudice and have no allegiance to a specific corporation. “Such codes of conflict and the consequences of breaking them, then need to be communicated frequently to staff members”(Gardyn, 2003).The company needs to make it clear what the consequences are for not following the signed agreement they have. A. The first problem is the misrepresentation. Because each director is calling as a director of the cooperative, his is misrepresenting his position to each client he calls. The Cooperative has no business dealing with the personal clients of the board members. This may make the personal clients feel that the cooperative supports their interest when they don’t have any desire too. B.Second problem conflict of interest, each board member is acting as a consultant and should never mix one organization with another, because they are saying to their personal clients they are on the board of directors when there really not. This kind of information should not be disclosed to personal clients, as personal clients are not connected to the cooperative. So depending on what positions the board members hold each one should be kept separate. If not it will be harder to......

Words: 965 - Pages: 4